<p>How old are you? Are you at Princeton now?</p>
<p>I believe the point was we are coming dangerously close to the same.</p>
<p>Hereshoping: No, not now. Let’s say I am a bit older – gentlemen don’t have to tell, do they? ; )</p>
<p>Well, I do agree that Vietnam vets were horribly misused, but I don’t think this is the case with Iraq War vets. I do think the nation as a whole has been sensitive to making sure they aren’t cold-shouldered or blamed for mistakes above their pay grade. At least I have seen no evidence of it apart from people who want to cloud the issues on it, and refight that fight from 35-40 years ago. I don’t think it pertains to the Iraq War is all.</p>
<p>Wow, I better stop trawling the posts here and get some work done. See you.</p>
<p>I have to respectfully disagree. I think that many, many members of my generation are having a very hard time differentiating between this war and Vietnam.</p>
<p>HH,</p>
<p>WWJD? </p>
<p>Some pretty sharp, mean spirited words from someone who doesn’t want anyone (myself:) ) invoking christ’s name in posts. How’d he feel about you calling mini a druggie and stoner? that’s OK? </p>
<p>Your last couple of posts are just attacking the person, not the opinion. Take a break and remember Jesus loves you very much, but not when you imply others are drug users and alcoholics because they disagree with you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yet not one war supporter here has mentioned petitioning the authorities to have more National Guard and Reservists from his or her own state mobilized. Not even the posters who more than likely come from states that have had far less than the median sent. </p>
<p>Really want to support the troops? Write to your Congressman to ask for Dragon Skin body armor to get a fair, independent evaluation. It has never been fully tested, and the reason that it hasn’t has never been disclosed. </p>
<p>What does the Secret Service wear? Dragon Skin.</p>
<p>Many of the soldiers in Iraq thought Dragon Skin was better at stopping multiple rounds from penetrating and were paying for it out of their own pockets, but the Army made them stop. Interceptor is manufactured by a huge contributor to Republican campaigns.</p>
<p>Maybe Dragon Skin is better and would save lives; maybe it’s worse. But we don’t know because the Army hasn’t taken the 3 hours it would take to test it.</p>
<p>Hereshoping: Well, there are very many analogies with Vietnam that are sound: we are fighting a war that has no hope of a winning outcome for us; we are damned if we do and if we don’t in the sense that if we leave we feel we will be signaling weakness to an enemy, but on the other hand, if we stay we will just waste lives and treasure and not secure a good outcome for the country we will eventually leave in tatters – and will actually be weaker; we were stampeded into this war on flimsy grounds, and we are fighting multiple enemies (as opposed to one in Vietnam) that consider their tribal/ethnic/religious allegiances to be paramount and that have national aspirations.</p>
<p>But the analogy of troops being misused or mistreated by anti-war folks?! What are you smoking? Must be something from the good old stoner AWOL days that your smoker friends left in your stash box. 'Cause that ain’t happening.</p>
<p>: )</p>
<p>“I think that many, many members of my generation are having a very hard time differentiating between this war and Vietnam.”</p>
<p>Did they support the Johnson administration back then? He was a democrat you know…:)</p>
<p>There is a similarity about both wars. Both are being poorly fought. Not by the forces there, but by those here at home. </p>
<p>Just like Johnson, they are fighting a political war. Those types of conflicts rarely work out. The question becomes who will be the next Nixon? Not the watergate Nixon, the other one who ended the war and as a result made the WALL have fewer names. You have to understand it is not UNamerican to expect more from our leadership. </p>
<p>You have to be careful with your personal attacks on some here, I’m sure I’m due next. Dad was on WAKE (aka the alamo of the pacific), spent years in a pow camp. Brother was a lrrp (lurp) in nam for his tours. Please don’t loosely imply I’m unamerican because I expect, no demand, more from our leaders than soundbites. </p>
<p>Personally my view is we shouldn’t let anyone from TEXAS be president… big on ideas and small on plans.</p>
<p>I wonder how many of the “you must agree 100% with the war or you hate the troops” posters agreed 100% with our country’s involvement in the Balkans during Clinton’s presidency? Seems to me I heard plenty of complaints from the right wing about that situation. But it never occured to me to throw around the accusations that those opposed to Iraq have to hear.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do you call this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am supposed to have more respect for the college boys who did everything they could to avoid the draft and spent their days getting stoned and “protesting,” many of whom are to this day denying that Vietnam vets were spat upon, than the guys who did what their country asked of them? </p>
<p>So let’s see, by extension, I take it I’m supposed to have more respect for you guys pontificating here than the guys over in Iraq now? </p>
<p>Okay, then.</p>
<p>And Opie, thanks for your concern, but personally I think Jesus would be okay with my opinion, especially since mini has regaled us many, many, many times with stories of his drug-induced college achievement.</p>
<p>Carry on, friends.</p>
<p>Hereshoping: I have come to learn that you may not have understood what I wrote. I wasn’t saying that these soldiers should have been expected to go AWOL or resist the draft or their duties. I was saying that they were reviled and spat at by people who thought they should do these things. Understanding derives from dialogue, which in turn derives from discussion, which in turn derives from comprehension, which is the result of education and intelligence. God help our democracy.</p>
<p>Soldiers returning from Vietnam were reviled. Those reviling them were people. The people who were reviling the soldiers and sometimes spitting on them thought the soldiers were wrong. They thought the soldiers should have refused their orders and the draft. They thought the soldiers should have gone AWOL. They thought the soldiers lacked moral courage. I did not agree with these people. I think it was a horrible, misguided thing to do to these soldiers. I do not agree that these soldiers should have gone AWOL or resisted orders (unless it was in their private conscience to do so, for which I would also not have blamed them).</p>
<p>Does breaking it down into shorter sentences help?</p>
<p>I wonder if the people who think there’s a disconnect between supporting the troops and opposing the war (and the way it has been handled) take the same position in their personal lives.</p>
<p>Spouse take a job for an industry that pollutes or price gouges? Divorce him. You can’t support your spouse and disagree with his boss, right? </p>
<p>Child’s teacher assigns him to balanced literacy lessons instead of phonics? Put him up for adoption. If you disagree with what he does in school, you can’t possibly love him, right?</p>
<p>I’d like to see them tell Jim Webb that the concerns he’s raised about the war mean he doesn’t support his soldier son in Iraq.</p>
<p>HH, remember, among the college boys who avoided the draft were our very own chickenhawks, currently residing in the big white house: Bush and Cheney, as well as those defunct hawks: Rummy, Scooter, Wolfie, Bolton…among others. Would you like the full list of chickenhawks?</p>
<p>Do you revile them as well, for avoiding their service to our country, or just the democratic college students? I need to get this straight.</p>
<p>I was in the U.S. Navy during the entire 1980s. Once I returned from overseas duty and was taking a subway through Washington DC. A young lady noticed my vacant look, and asked me if I was ok. I told her I had been dodging donkeys and cowdung for a couple years in the Azores, and was sort of bewildered by what I was seeing. She told me “Welcome home,” and I really appreciated it. Just tell the military folks you see that you appreciate what they are doing…that’s enough.</p>
<p>When I was stationed in Spain, I was the Duty Officer on Christmas Eve. Late at night I went to the 24-hour cafeteria at the on-base air terminal to get something to eat. I remember that the place had about a dozen guys there–all their respective units’ duty officers, and all sitting alone in separate booths. One guy got up and broke stiff-upper-lip protocol: he went booth to booth wishing everybody a Merry Christmas…one of the most touching things I’ve ever seen.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wish my dad had lived into the internet age. He would have loved the chance to talk with someone stationed in the Azores in a different generation. (He was stationed there for part of his WWII service).</p>
<p>TourGuide446: That’s a beautiful story. Thanks for sharing.</p>
<p>FundingFather: You never refuted the greater list of areas where intelligence was skewed by politicos to justify the Iraq War. And a further problem for your position is the new Pentagon report showing that Feith’s Office of Special Plans at the Pentagon acted inappropriately and used faulty and weak evidence and made assertions at odds with the consensus of the intelligence community. Note that his acts were not on the other hand found illegal, because Paul Wolfowitz who had long been an advocate of attacking Iraq authorized “alternative” intelligence activities. In other words, if you don’t get the answer you want, appoint others who will give you that answer.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0209/p99s01-duts.html[/url]”>http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0209/p99s01-duts.html</a></p>